Re: [OSM-talk] odd rendering + county boundaries
As Jon says we are on the case, but it is not simple. BTW not done deliberately, more a result of counties/countries being put in relations and then picking up styling by default that was designed with some other instance in mind. This is equally true of rendering names along boundaries which was not designed for, but is an artefact of the same process. Cheers STEVE(8) -Original Message- From: Jon Burgess [mailto:jburgess...@googlemail.com] Sent: Mon 3/2/2009 7:00 PM To: ke...@kevinpeat.com Cc: Thomas Wood; OSM Talk; Steve Chilton Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] odd rendering + county boundaries On Mon, 2009-03-02 at 13:00 +, Kevin Peat wrote: It's two thingsthe county boundary shouldn't go up rivers in the first place but also the part of the boundary that follows the coast would be better not being rendered. It seems to me that it must be included in a relation so that the county is an area but would be better not being visible. Kevin I discussed this with Steve8 a few days ago on IRC and the plan is to: - Hide any boundary rendering on ways with natural=coastline - When there is more than one boundary on a given way, only render the one with the lowest admin_level. This corresponds to the most important boundary. It is complicated by the fact that the information has to be cross-referenced across multiple objects. This will need some extra processing in osm2pgsql to implement and it may be a few weeks before I get around to it. Jon ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] odd rendering + county boundaries
I believe that there's some boundary rendering bugs that are yet to be fixed in mapnik, I've not seen this one before. As a side issue, does the county boundary really go up the river like that or just cut across the mouth? I think we need to review this. I recall talking to steve8 who did the boundary relation for the southwest counties that he'd just added the coastline to the relation, and not considered river mouths. I'll look into the data myself if I get the time. 2009/3/2 Kevin Peat ke...@kevinpeat.com: I made some changes a couple of weeks ago to the banks of the River Dart through Totnes http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=50.42863lon=-3.67974zoom=15layers=B000FFF Obviously those changes have been picked up as the county boundary is rendering along the updated river bank but the actual river isn't. Is this just a time lag thing or have I done something wrong? On the subject of UK county boundaries it's nice to see them rendering (in Mapnik) but it seems a bit odd for the boundaries to be rendered around coastlines and up river estuaries. Is it possible to only render the inland parts ie. where the ways are not tagged as natural=coastline? thanks, Kevin ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk -- Regards, Thomas Wood (Edgemaster) ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] odd rendering + county boundaries
Maybe the coastal part of the boundary should follow the baseline as per http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Maritime_borders The base line is the maritime border closest to the coast, and will probably not be rendered on most maps. --[] On Mon, 2 Mar 2009 11:22:34 +, Thomas Wood grand.edgemas...@gmail.com wrote: I believe that there's some boundary rendering bugs that are yet to be fixed in mapnik, I've not seen this one before. As a side issue, does the county boundary really go up the river like that or just cut across the mouth? I think we need to review this. I recall talking to steve8 who did the boundary relation for the southwest counties that he'd just added the coastline to the relation, and not considered river mouths. I'll look into the data myself if I get the time. 2009/3/2 Kevin Peat ke...@kevinpeat.com: I made some changes a couple of weeks ago to the banks of the River Dart through Totnes http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=50.42863lon=-3.67974zoom=15layers=B000FFF Obviously those changes have been picked up as the county boundary is rendering along the updated river bank but the actual river isn't. Is this just a time lag thing or have I done something wrong? On the subject of UK county boundaries it's nice to see them rendering (in Mapnik) but it seems a bit odd for the boundaries to be rendered around coastlines and up river estuaries. Is it possible to only render the inland parts ie. where the ways are not tagged as natural=coastline? thanks, Kevin ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk -- Brgds Aun Johnsen via Webmail ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] odd rendering + county boundaries
The reason it is being rendered is because the coastline is included in the boundary relation, not (afaik) any tagging on the coastline and/or overlapping boundary ways. 2009/3/2 Aun Johnsen (via Webmail) skipp...@gimnechiske.org: Maybe the coastal part of the boundary should follow the baseline as per http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Maritime_borders The base line is the maritime border closest to the coast, and will probably not be rendered on most maps. --[] On Mon, 2 Mar 2009 11:22:34 +, Thomas Wood grand.edgemas...@gmail.com wrote: I believe that there's some boundary rendering bugs that are yet to be fixed in mapnik, I've not seen this one before. As a side issue, does the county boundary really go up the river like that or just cut across the mouth? I think we need to review this. I recall talking to steve8 who did the boundary relation for the southwest counties that he'd just added the coastline to the relation, and not considered river mouths. I'll look into the data myself if I get the time. 2009/3/2 Kevin Peat ke...@kevinpeat.com: I made some changes a couple of weeks ago to the banks of the River Dart through Totnes http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=50.42863lon=-3.67974zoom=15layers=B000FFF Obviously those changes have been picked up as the county boundary is rendering along the updated river bank but the actual river isn't. Is this just a time lag thing or have I done something wrong? On the subject of UK county boundaries it's nice to see them rendering (in Mapnik) but it seems a bit odd for the boundaries to be rendered around coastlines and up river estuaries. Is it possible to only render the inland parts ie. where the ways are not tagged as natural=coastline? thanks, Kevin ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk -- Brgds Aun Johnsen via Webmail ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk -- Regards, Thomas Wood (Edgemaster) ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] odd rendering + county boundaries
It's two thingsthe county boundary shouldn't go up rivers in the first place but also the part of the boundary that follows the coast would be better not being rendered. It seems to me that it must be included in a relation so that the county is an area but would be better not being visible. Kevin Thomas Wood wrote: The reason it is being rendered is because the coastline is included in the boundary relation, not (afaik) any tagging on the coastline and/or overlapping boundary ways. 2009/3/2 Aun Johnsen (via Webmail) skipp...@gimnechiske.org: Maybe the coastal part of the boundary should follow the baseline as per http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Maritime_borders The base line is the maritime border closest to the coast, and will probably not be rendered on most maps. --[] On Mon, 2 Mar 2009 11:22:34 +, Thomas Wood grand.edgemas...@gmail.com wrote: I believe that there's some boundary rendering bugs that are yet to be fixed in mapnik, I've not seen this one before. As a side issue, does the county boundary really go up the river like that or just cut across the mouth? I think we need to review this. I recall talking to steve8 who did the boundary relation for the southwest counties that he'd just added the coastline to the relation, and not considered river mouths. I'll look into the data myself if I get the time. 2009/3/2 Kevin Peat ke...@kevinpeat.com: I made some changes a couple of weeks ago to the banks of the River Dart through Totnes http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=50.42863lon=-3.67974zoom=15layers=B000FFF Obviously those changes have been picked up as the county boundary is rendering along the updated river bank but the actual river isn't. Is this just a time lag thing or have I done something wrong? On the subject of UK county boundaries it's nice to see them rendering (in Mapnik) but it seems a bit odd for the boundaries to be rendered around coastlines and up river estuaries. Is it possible to only render the inland parts ie. where the ways are not tagged as natural=coastline? thanks, Kevin ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk -- Brgds Aun Johnsen via Webmail ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] odd rendering + county boundaries
On Mon, 2009-03-02 at 13:00 +, Kevin Peat wrote: It's two thingsthe county boundary shouldn't go up rivers in the first place but also the part of the boundary that follows the coast would be better not being rendered. It seems to me that it must be included in a relation so that the county is an area but would be better not being visible. Kevin I discussed this with Steve8 a few days ago on IRC and the plan is to: - Hide any boundary rendering on ways with natural=coastline - When there is more than one boundary on a given way, only render the one with the lowest admin_level. This corresponds to the most important boundary. It is complicated by the fact that the information has to be cross-referenced across multiple objects. This will need some extra processing in osm2pgsql to implement and it may be a few weeks before I get around to it. Jon ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] odd rendering + county boundaries
Thanks Jon, that's great. Kevin Jon Burgess wrote: On Mon, 2009-03-02 at 10:51 +, Kevin Peat wrote: I made some changes a couple of weeks ago to the banks of the River Dart through Totnes http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=50.42863lon=-3.67974zoom=15layers=B000FFF Obviously those changes have been picked up as the county boundary is rendering along the updated river bank but the actual river isn't. Is this just a time lag thing or have I done something wrong? There is a lag. The coastlines are generated from a set of shapefiles which is periodically updated from the OSM data. I've just fetched the latest updates. You probably won't see much difference in the map tiles until the weekend, but images from the export tab will show them right away (see attached). Jon ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
